Our Framework
Our proprietary framework identifies the clinical, regulatory, and commercial risks that standard due diligence misses — before capital is deployed.
Proprietary assessment framework
Physician & engineer-led review
Against documented outcomes
Typical assessment timeline
How It Works
Your assessment moves through six integrated stages — each combining physician expertise with engineering rigor.
Our proprietary framework evaluates life science technologies across multiple assessment domains — each containing proprietary risk categories refined through analysis of 2,000+ documented outcomes. The specific criteria and weights are never disclosed.
Proprietary categories assessing clinical viability from the physician's perspective — the factors that kill 75% of medical device startups.
Physician & BME-led reviewProprietary categories evaluating regulatory and reimbursement risk — where missteps create 12-18 month delays.
Pathway & complianceProprietary categories assessing technical and manufacturing readiness — the silent portfolio killers.
Engineering-led reviewProprietary categories stress-testing commercial assumptions under real-world conditions, not pitch deck projections.
Market & exit analysisThe specific categories, evaluation criteria, and scoring weights are proprietary — refined through analysis of documented device outcomes and tailored by stage, device class, and intended market.
We share the full framework under NDA during discovery calls so you can evaluate our approach before engaging. Request a methodology briefing →
What Sets Us Apart
Every assessment domain receives a proprietary Vantage Score with detailed justification. Our scoring system distinguishes between risks that require immediate intervention and those that are manageable with appropriate resources and timeline. The composite Vantage Score gives you a single, calibrated number backed by domain-level detail.
Our framework distinguishes between risks that can be mitigated through execution and those that represent fundamental barriers — so you know exactly where to invest and where to walk away.
Our proprietary analysis combines physician and biomedical engineering domain expertise with an extensive database of documented life science outcomes. Each submission is evaluated across multiple strategic domains using proprietary risk categories calibrated against real-world successes and failures.
Will physicians adopt it? Will regulators approve it? Will payers cover it? We assess the clinical and regulatory risks that traditional DD misses entirely.
Can it be manufactured at scale? Is the IP defensible? We evaluate engineering maturity, IP landscape, and technical risk from a biomedical engineering lens.
Do the market assumptions hold under clinical reality? We stress-test commercial viability against real-world adoption patterns, not pitch deck projections.
Does the team have the depth to execute? We assess organizational readiness, leadership gaps, and financial trajectory against stage-appropriate benchmarks.
Proprietary scoring calibrated against an extensive database of documented life science outcomes, validated through cross-validation against clinical and commercial results.
Your Assessment Team
Every engagement is led by our co-founders — a physician and biomedical engineer who review your assessment personally.
Practicing physician & Medical Director. Chairs P&T Committee evaluating device adoption. Clinical Informatics & Bioethics.
ConnectBiomedical engineer, ex-Axonics (through Boston Scientific's $4.1B acquisition). Assesses manufacturing, quality systems & engineering depth.
ConnectSupported by Senior Advisor Rinda Sama (former COO, Axonics) and a specialist network spanning 8 life science verticals. Meet the full team →
In 2-3 weeks, you'll have a comprehensive risk report and a clear roadmap for your next steps.
Not sure if you need an assessment? In a free 20-minute call, we'll identify the 3 biggest risks in your device category.
† Based on retrospective analysis of documented device outcomes across 2,000+ biomedical companies in our proprietary database. Relative Predictive Concordance represents the proportion of technologies correctly classified relative to subsequent clinical and commercial outcomes across our proprietary benchmark dataset.